AMD Radeon 780M vs AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive overall victory for the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT in the direct comparisons, taking all three shared tests. The most significant gap appears in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the RX 5500 XT scores 46,965 against the Radeon 780M's 18,602. This represents a 60.4% advantage for the discrete card, a substantial margin that reflects the raw compute throughput difference between the two designs.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test tells a similar story, though with a slightly different magnitude. The RX 5500 XT posts a score of 1,032 while the 780M manages 480, a delta of 53.5% in favor of the discrete GPU. This particular benchmark stresses modern DirectX 12 rendering workloads, and the result indicates that the RX 5500 XT handles these tasks with considerably more headroom. Interestingly, the 780M's score places it in the 61st percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the RX 5500 XT sits at the 57th percentile, despite the latter winning every head-to-head test. This suggests the 780M benefits from a broader benchmark suite that includes lighter workloads where its unified memory architecture and modern feature set perform relatively better.

The closest contest appears in the Geekbench Vulkan test. Here the RX 5500 XT scores 44,191 versus the 780M's 33,683, a 23.8% advantage. This narrower margin hints that the 780M's RDNA 3.0 architecture handles Vulkan's lower-level API efficiently, closing some of the gap seen in OpenCL. Still, the RX 5500 XT wins outright, and the overall record stands at three wins for the discrete card and zero for the integrated solution.

When placed against their respective nearest rivals in the database, both GPUs show tight clustering. The 780M's average benchmark score of 17,588 sits within 0.5% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (17,639) and 0.4% of the AMD Radeon HD 7790 (17,666). The RX 5500 XT's average of 14,692 places it 2.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (14,385) and 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro M2000 (14,532). These proximity figures contextualize the head-to-head results: while the RX 5500 XT dominates this particular matchup, neither card is an outlier in the broader performance landscape.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT wins with a score of 1,032 against the AMD Radeon 780M's 480, a 53.5% advantage.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RX 5500 XT scores 46,965 versus the 780M's 18,602, giving the discrete card a 60.4% lead in this compute-oriented test.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the Radeon 780M comes close to the RX 5500 XT?

A: The closest result is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RX 5500 XT leads by 23.8% (44,191 versus 33,683). This is still a clear win for the discrete GPU but a much smaller margin than the other tests.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The Radeon 780M has an average score of 17,588 across all recorded tests, while the RX 5500 XT averages 14,692. Despite losing all head-to-head tests, the 780M has a higher overall average due to its performance in other benchmarks not shared between the two.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The 780M is 0.2% above the AMD Radeon Pro 560 (17,551) and 0.5% above the AMD Radeon Pro 460 (17,509). The RX 5500 XT is 2.1% above the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (14,385) and 1.1% above the NVIDIA Quadro M2000 (14,532).

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The Radeon 780M sits at the 61st percentile, while the RX 5500 XT is at the 57th percentile. This reflects the 780M's stronger performance in the broader benchmark database despite losing this specific comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different generations of AMD's RDNA architecture. The Radeon 780M uses RDNA 3.0, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC with the Phoenix chip. This is the newest design, released on January 30, 2024, and belongs to the Navi III IGP generation. The RX 5500 XT uses the older RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process with the Navi 14 chip, and was released on December 11, 2019, as part of the Navi (RX 5000) generation.

Process technology differences are stark. The 780M packs 25,390 million transistors into a 178 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 142.6 million per square millimeter. The RX 5500 XT contains only 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, with a density of 40.5 million per square millimeter. This means the 780M has nearly four times the transistor count in a slightly larger package, a direct consequence of the more advanced 4 nm node.

The 780M includes 12 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the RX 5500 XT, which lists no RT cores. This gives the integrated GPU hardware-accelerated ray tracing capability that the older discrete card cannot match. The 780M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the RX 5500 XT is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Shading resources differ substantially. The RX 5500 XT has 1,408 shading units and 88 texture mapping units, while the 780M has 768 shading units and 48 TMUs. Both have 32 ROPs. Despite the RX 5500 XT's higher shader count, the 780M achieves higher pixel rate (92.80 GPixel/s versus 59.04 GPixel/s) due to its much higher boost clock. The 780M's texture rate is lower at 139.2 GTexel/s versus 162.4 GTexel/s for the RX 5500 XT.

Specification Differences

Clock speeds show a significant divergence. The 780M has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, while the RX 5500 XT runs at 1607 MHz base and 1845 MHz boost, with a game clock of 1717 MHz. The 780M's boost clock is over 1 GHz higher, which helps compensate for its lower shader count.

Memory configurations are fundamentally different. The 780M uses system shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth, while the RX 5500 XT has dedicated 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 5500 XT's memory clock is listed as 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed. This dedicated memory gives the discrete card a major advantage in bandwidth-sensitive workloads.

Power and physical specs vary widely. The 780M is an IGP with a 15 W TDP and no power connectors, while the RX 5500 XT is a dual-slot card with a 130 W TDP, one 8-pin power connector, and a suggested PSU of 300 W. The RX 5500 XT measures 180 mm (7.1 inches) in length. The 780M's display outputs are motherboard dependent, while the RX 5500 XT offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

The RX 5500 XT has a launch MSRP of 169 USD. The 780M has no recorded launch MSRP. Production status differs as well: the 780M is Active, while the RX 5500 XT is End-of-life. The 780M's FP32 compute is 8.909 TFLOPS, notably higher than the RX 5500 XT's 5.196 TFLOPS. In FP16, the 780M maintains 8.909 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the RX 5500 XT achieves 10.39 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 5500 XT wins in every direct benchmark comparison. Its 60.4% lead in OpenCL makes it the clear choice for compute-heavy tasks like general-purpose GPU programming, physics simulations, and data processing. The 53.5% advantage in 3DMark Steel Nomad indicates superior raw rasterization performance for traditional gaming workloads, particularly at higher resolutions where dedicated memory bandwidth matters. The 23.8% Vulkan lead, while smaller, still makes it the stronger option for Vulkan-based games and applications.

The 780M's advantages lie outside these shared tests. Its higher average benchmark score of 17,588 versus 14,692 reflects strong performance in other database tests. The 12 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced effects, a feature the RX 5500 XT lacks entirely. The DirectX 12 Ultimate support enables features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading that the older card cannot utilize. Its 8.909 TFLOPS of FP32 compute exceeds the RX 5500 XT's 5.196 TFLOPS, suggesting better performance in workloads that leverage raw shader math rather than memory bandwidth.

The 780M's 15 W TDP versus 130 W makes it dramatically more power-efficient. It requires no additional power connectors and occupies no expansion slot, fitting directly on the motherboard. The RX 5500 XT needs a 300 W power supply and a dual-slot PCIe card. For compact or low-power systems, the 780M offers capabilities in a fraction of the power envelope.

The Verdict

The data directs different users to different products. The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT is the superior choice for anyone running the tested benchmarks: 3DMark Steel Nomad, Geekbench OpenCL, and Geekbench Vulkan. It wins all three with margins from 23.8% to 60.4%, making it the stronger performer for gaming and compute applications that resemble these workloads. Its dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 memory with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent performance without competing with the system for memory resources. This card suits users building a dedicated gaming or workstation PC who can accommodate a 130 W dual-slot card and a 300 W power supply.

The AMD Radeon 780M is the better fit for systems where power draw and physical space are primary constraints. Its 15 W TDP, IGP form factor, and lack of power connectors allow it to operate in thin-and-light laptops or compact desktops where a discrete card cannot fit. Its higher average benchmark score across the full database, 61st percentile ranking, and modern architecture with ray tracing support make it a capable integrated solution. It also carries DirectX 12 Ultimate support, a feature absent from the RX 5500 XT, which may matter for future software titles.

Users who prioritize raw performance in the tested scenarios should select the RX 5500 XT, acknowledging its end-of-life status and higher power demands. Users who need an energy-efficient, zero-slot solution with modern API support and competitive overall database scores should choose the 780M. The RX 5500 XT's launch MSRP of 169 USD reflects its original market positioning, while the 780M's role as an integrated GPU means it carries no standalone price in the database. The choice ultimately hinges on system constraints and workload priorities rather than a single performance metric.